4 ms·
Joyent drops Gab's web hosting
- jakelazaroff 8y agoObligatory reminder that this has nothing to do with freedom of speech; Joyent is a private company and may do business (or not) with whomever they choose.
- Nathanba 8y agoObligatory reminder that free speech is an ideal that goes way past the american constitution.
- jakelazaroff 8y agoAn ideal which doesn't place Gab's right to host any speech it wishes above Joyent's right not to.
- emmelaich 8y agoOf course but ... nothing? > nothing to do with freedom of speech Of course it has something to do with freedom of speech. I agree with you and Joyent on their decision. But don't overreach.
- jakelazaroff 8y agoIn the sense of the "ideal" of freedom of speech, sure. In practice, almost everyone uses this to argue that some speech they don't like should be suppressed, e.g. Joyent should be compelled to host Gab. Literally no one is a free speech absolutist. In the sense that I originally meant it — the legal sense — this indeed has nothing to do with freedom of speech.
- emmelaich 8y ago"compelled" ?! I think that people think it regrettable. That's all.
- core-questions 8y agoIts status as an ideal or even as a moral good is being attacked from all sides. We're forgetting the lessons of the last few hundred years, we're forgetting Voltaire, and we are adamant that the baby be thrown out with the bathwater. Do people think deplatforming changes minds? Of course it's well within Joyent's rights to do this, but the effect will not be a solution.
- LordlyLad 8y agoObligatory reminder, that this has EVERYTHING to do with freedom of speech. Being a private company does not excuse this downright vicious attack on one of the only few platforms of freedom of speech on the internet today. First it was Microsoft severing ties and now Joyent & Paypal. And what a coincidence this starts happening just around the time an in-house Google presentation leaked naming Gab as one of their direct competitors. Gab is only the first to be targeted, what's stopping them from destroying every platform of freedom of speech that competes with their plans for "The Good Censor"
- _pmf_ 8y agoObligatory reminder that a private baking business may be forced to bake gay wedding cakes and the last parr of your argument is moot.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- throwaway2016a 8y agoObligatory reminder that protected class is different than free speech and political stance is not a protected class and sexual orientation is (or should be depending on where you live). Your analogy is moot. Whether you side with the baker or the wedding couple, comparing it with this is not a valid analogy.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- _pmf_ 8y ago> political stance is not a protected class and sexual orientation is (or should be depending on where you live) Despite what your pink haired friends might tell you, you cannot mutually substitute "political stance" and "Christian belief", as the supreme court confirms[0]. [0] https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/04/politics/masterpiece-colorado-gay-marriage-cake-supreme-court/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/04/politics/masterpiece-colo...
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- nimbius 8y agogab apparently hosts some rather inciteful and controversial speech. Albeit I wonder if GNU social might be a better alternative? paypal also severed ties...so as far as i can gather this just feels like shooting the messenger. Hopefully this spurs gab to invest in devops. losing your hosting provider should mean you can reload your site in a matter of minutes anywhere else with automated toolchains and CI. I wonder why it takes months?
- LordlyLad 8y agoGab hosts a platform for freedom of speech, having the freedom to say whatever the fuck you like comes with the downsides of getting your feelings hurt. Shutting down a platform like this only attacks the ideals that the United States was founded upon. Why are the corporations STILL controlling where we speak?
- minimaxir 8y agoDupe: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18318788 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18318788
- actionowl 8y agoIt says right there in the truncated message from Joyent that they violated the accdptable use policy, a policy they agreed to when they created their account. I don’t understand why they’re surprised. Co-location is likely a better route for someone like Gab.
- tzs 8y agoIt's an interesting acceptable use policy [1]. Interpreted literally, it is breathtakingly broad to the point that it is hard to imagine a useful site that does not violate it. There are three categories of things that you are not to post, transmit, re-transmit or store on or through any of their products. 1. Material that is "in violation of any local, state, federal or non-United States law or regulation". 2. Material that is "threatening, obscene, indecent, defamatory or that otherwise could adversely affect any individual, group or entity". 3. Material that "violates the rights of any person, including rights protected by copyright, trade secret, patent or other intellectual property or similar laws or regulations including, but not limited to, the installation or distribution of “pirated” or other software products that are not appropriately licensed for use by Customer". [1] https://www.joyent.com/about/policies/cloud-hosting-acceptable-use-policy https://www.joyent.com/about/policies/cloud-hosting-acceptab...
- _pmf_ 8y agoThe killer (Cesar, as CNN lovingly calls him, in line with their history of making sure mass murderers become immortal) also made death threats via Twitter: https://mobile.twitter.com/RochelleRitchie/status/1055867631461416962 https://mobile.twitter.com/RochelleRitchie/status/1055867631... Somehow I doubt hosting providers will apply the same moral standards as they think they are doing for Gab.
- hprotagonist 8y agothat’s the other guy. this article is about the pittsburgh suspect not the florida suspect or the kentucky suspect. it’s been a suspectful week.